> Energy that could supply other uses is now not available

Could, but often isn't. I don't have a good source other than an obviously biased one (https://www.coindesk.com/the-last-word-on-bitcoins-energy-co...), but this does sound sensible:

> Sichuan, second only in the hashpower rankings to Xinjiang, is a province characterized by a massive overbuild of hydroelectric power in the last decade. Sichuan’s installed hydro capacity is double what its power grid can support, leading to lots of “curtailment” (or waste). Dams can only store so much potential energy in the form of water before they must let it out. It’s an open secret that this otherwise-wasted energy has been put to use mining Bitcoin

China already built 2 of the longest transmission lines in the world (~2000km), so location doesn't seem a huge issue. The question is - is the extra energy not being transported because there's an existing use for it (btc), or would it be generated and not used anyway. Or would the power plants just get shut down otherwise?

I know that we mine roughly 8% of bitcoin here in Iceland and our power comes from hydro as well.